advertisement
Forums

The Forum is sponsored by 
 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the Tips and Deals forum
Will cache size, 16GB vs 32GB, make a major difference in a RAID 0 setup for video?
Posted by: tahoedrew
Date: January 07, 2010 12:54AM
I'm upgrading my RAID drives for video. Currently I am using two OWC Mercury Elite Pro RAID enclosures with an EIDE interface (two 120GB drives in the first enclosure and two 320GB drives in the second enclosure). Back then, there was little option (if any) above 8GB of RAM cache. Of course the two drives are approaching their capacity and I decided it was time to upgrade to just one enclosure that could hold everything that I was working on, and that I'd change the EIDE Elite RAID drives to JBOD and manually make "mirrored" drives for long-term storage of old projects.

Looking at SATA drives today for the new EZ Quest RAID enclosure I got a week or so before Christmas I started to really wonder about whether there would be a difference for LARGE, HD video files. My only other exposure to SATA drive cache has been the 500GB WD drive I installed in my MacBook Pro, and a "green" WD drive that was just a multimedia drive in a G5 I've since sold.

I'm well aware that SATA drives have dramatically increased cache size from the days of 2GB/8GB options on EIDE drives, I just don't know the real-world effects.

Given my enclosure will RAID the drives, two 16GB cache drives will actually produce a drive with 32GB of cache, of course I wonder if a 64GB cache RAID drive would just chew through frames (data) without regard for human life itself (and if it's worth it to seek 1TB drives with 32GB cache).

I'll admit I'm being lazy and haven't searched the forums or barefeats.com for an answer to my question, but I thought I'd pose it here first.

Thanks for any guidance,
~A



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2010 12:56AM by tahoedrew.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Will cache size, 16GB vs 32GB, make a major difference in a RAID 0 setup for video?
Posted by: DRR
Date: January 07, 2010 05:43AM
(If I'm reading your post right,)

There are no drives with GB's of cache. They come in MB. 8MB, 16MB, 32MB cache is the most common. So your RAIDED volume with two 1TB drives would yield only 64MB of combined cache.

So no, it wouldn't make a lick of difference. Look for drives with high sustained transfer speeds if you're doing video. I assume we're talking HD?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Will cache size, 16GB vs 32GB, make a major difference in a RAID 0 setup for video?
Posted by: Jimmypoo
Date: January 07, 2010 07:11AM
GOOD GOD MAN! POINT ME TOWARD THESE DRIVES WITH SSD CACHES ON BOARD!



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Will cache size, 16GB vs 32GB, make a major difference in a RAID 0 setup for video?
Posted by: Doc
Date: January 07, 2010 08:17AM
You're using FireWire 800?

However sweet FW800 may otherwise be, cache size is almost irrelevant in this case.

You'll never get anywhere near the top drive-speed of your RAID.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Will cache size, 16GB vs 32GB, make a major difference in a RAID 0 setup for video?
Posted by: mattkime
Date: January 07, 2010 09:47AM
>>However sweet FW800 may otherwise be, cache size is almost irrelevant in this case.

agreed.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Will cache size, 16GB vs 32GB, make a major difference in a RAID 0 setup for video?
Posted by: onthedownlow
Date: January 07, 2010 09:57AM
64MB cache drives are very, very responsive and fast.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Will cache size, 16GB vs 32GB, make a major difference in a RAID 0 setup for video?
Posted by: tahoedrew
Date: January 07, 2010 05:36PM
Sorry everyone, not sure how I got GB rather than MB!

Yes, it's FW800 to a RAID enclosure, good to know it won't make a difference for HD video.

~A
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 211
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020